Note that 0.93 can't go online in x86. Also, it requires C++11 so you'll need a libstd that is recent enough. You can probably get that package from the LTS backports repo.

Quote

do we have to install 0.93 on both online and offline pc's?

Only the online machine

Ugh, I just realized I bet we broke the 12.04 offline bundle with this release. I bet no one tested that... we really need to widen the testing net better. In the future, we might offer quadruple bounties for the first bug found in each of a bunch of categories. That would include testing the offline bundles, and lots of corner case features...

Technically, this is possible.In some cases the data needed for signing is huge, up to megabytes. It would then be close to impossible to transfer via QR, and that user might be in serious trouble then. Like with many many inputs from mining, for example. Even with non-extreme but large transactions it would not be very practical.

There are several ideas how to do "airgapping" securely. How I understand it, we are waiting for addon-ability for Armory first, then these optional and sometimes controversial options would be possible.

Ente

You are right but in most cases, this wouldn't be a problem. The Qr-code's size will increase, so you might need a an Android phone with a good camera.

1- I hibernate the laptop with Armory opened.2- I back from hibernate.3- Armory doesnt syncronize. (To syncronize again I need to restart Armory).

OS: Ubuntu 64

Nothing can be done about this. Some of Armory's stack is forced in the RAM through mlock. Hibernation copies the entire RAM into the swap partition. Since that would defeat mlock's purpose, mlock'ed memory is not copied imaged in on hibernation. Armory won't be able to recover from that.

Hi,

I was testing the last version of Armory and I think this was fixed, right?

Note that 0.93 can't go online in x86. Also, it requires C++11 so you'll need a libstd that is recent enough. You can probably get that package from the LTS backports repo.

Quote

do we have to install 0.93 on both online and offline pc's?

Only the online machine

Ugh, I just realized I bet we broke the 12.04 offline bundle with this release. I bet no one tested that... we really need to widen the testing net better. In the future, we might offer quadruple bounties for the first bug found in each of a bunch of categories. That would include testing the offline bundles, and lots of corner case features...

I might need to update the offline bundles and re-release 0.93...

You may want to consider some updates to the online dllinks.txt file at some point to reflect all of this...

E.g., removing the 32 (bit) flag from all of the Armory 0.93 versions (keeping it for ArmoryOffline though), and removing 12.04 from the Armory & ArmoryOffline Ubuntu lines until/unless you intend to distribute your own libstdc++6 (FYI a newer version isn't in the backports repo unfortunately).

Will Bitcoin 0.10.0 become available through the secure downloader, now that Armory officially supports it?

Speaking of updates to the dllinks.txt file (that's the file that would need updating and re-signing for 0.10.0 to become available).

Yes it will, the problem is that it's not split up by Armory version, so updating 0.10 in the secure downloader would push it to the all the 0.92.3 users as well, who haven't upgraded. I figured I would remove all the torrent code and push 0.10 all at once, but I'll give it some time for people to upgrade Armory first.

Yes it will, the problem is that it's not split up by Armory version, so updating 0.10 in the secure downloader would push it to the all the 0.92.3 users as well, who haven't upgraded. I figured I would remove all the torrent code and push 0.10 all at once, but I'll give it some time for people to upgrade Armory first.

Good point. You should wait! I will download it manually as I used to do, it is not *that* hard to check the signatures manually

Will Bitcoin 0.10.0 become available through the secure downloader, now that Armory officially supports it?

Speaking of updates to the dllinks.txt file (that's the file that would need updating and re-signing for 0.10.0 to become available).

Yes it will, the problem is that it's not split up by Armory version, so updating 0.10 in the secure downloader would push it to the all the 0.92.3 users as well, who haven't upgraded. I figured I would remove all the torrent code and push 0.10 all at once, but I'll give it some time for people to upgrade Armory first.

Ugh, I just realized I bet we broke the 12.04 offline bundle with this release. I bet no one tested that... we really need to widen the testing net better. In the future, we might offer quadruple bounties for the first bug found in each of a bunch of categories. That would include testing the offline bundles, and lots of corner case features...

I might need to update the offline bundles and re-release 0.93...

Armory-0.93 Win7 64 bit version (Version 0.93-beta-84a5897ec2) also has a problem: Today it crashed and rebuilt Armory database 3 times.

The latest version has memory leaks, badly. It consume 15.8 GB of my 16 GB Windows memory, every time.

What's Armory's RAM usage? I think you are confusing RAM used by the process and in use memory pages. The OS won't shy away from filling that up when a lot of access is performed on mmap'ed files, which will happen a lot during a DB scan. That doesn't mean the RAM is in use, it means the OS is chugging unused RAM to shuffle file data in and out of it. If a process was to ask for more RAM it would get priority over this memory.

The OS has no reason to empty this memory once Armory is done scanning. For all it knows, Armory just asked for intensive access to this data, so the OS expects it will again. Unless other processes start asking for more RAM or Armory is closed, the OS will keep these unused pages filled with the DB's mmap'ed files.

The latest version has memory leaks, badly. It consume 15.8 GB of my 16 GB Windows memory, every time.

What's Armory's RAM usage? I think you are confusing RAM used by the process and in use memory pages. The OS won't shy away from filling that up when a lot of access is performed on mmap'ed files, which will happen a lot during a DB scan. That doesn't mean the RAM is in use, it means the OS is chugging unused RAM to shuffle file data in and out of it. If a process was to ask for more RAM it would get priority over this memory.

The OS has no reason to empty this memory once Armory is done scanning. For all it knows, Armory just asked for intensive access to this data, so the OS expects it will again. Unless other processes start asking for more RAM or Armory is closed, the OS will keep these unused pages filled with the DB's mmap'ed files.

I think you are correct. It's probably not a memory leak, ArmoryQt itself only uses 300M, on top of bitcoind's 500M. However it's still scary to see so much memory being mmap'd, rarely have I seen this before.

The latest version has memory leaks, badly. It consume 15.8 GB of my 16 GB Windows memory, every time.

What's Armory's RAM usage? I think you are confusing RAM used by the process and in use memory pages. The OS won't shy away from filling that up when a lot of access is performed on mmap'ed files, which will happen a lot during a DB scan. That doesn't mean the RAM is in use, it means the OS is chugging unused RAM to shuffle file data in and out of it. If a process was to ask for more RAM it would get priority over this memory.

The OS has no reason to empty this memory once Armory is done scanning. For all it knows, Armory just asked for intensive access to this data, so the OS expects it will again. Unless other processes start asking for more RAM or Armory is closed, the OS will keep these unused pages filled with the DB's mmap'ed files.

I think you are correct. It's probably not a memory leak, ArmoryQt itself only uses 300M, on top of bitcoind's 500M. However it's still scary to see so much memory being mmap'd, rarely have I seen this before.

Thanks for pointing that out.

If you restart Armory it shouldn't be mmap'ing as much memory. Next version will be a lot tamer on that front, and I also may just close and reopen the DB just to flush out the mmap data after the scan is over. For now you'll have to deal with the scary numbers =P